“’We found systemic compensation disparities against women pretty much across the entire workforce,’ Janette Wipper, a DoL regional director, testified in court in San Francisco on Friday.

Reached for comment Friday afternoon, Janet Herold, regional solicitor for the DoL, said: ‘The investigation is not complete, but at this point the department has received compelling evidence of very significant discrimination against women in the most common positions at Google headquarters.’

Herold added: ‘The government’s analysis at this point indicates that discrimination against women in Google is quite extreme, even in this industry.’

Google strongly denied the accusations of inequities, claiming it did not have a gender pay gap.

Google began releasing diversity statistics in 2014 and reported last year that women made up 31% of its overall workforce and that only 2% of workers were black and 3% Latino. White employees accounted for 59% of the US workforce and Asians made up 32%.”

They didn’t see this coming? The pie in the sky dream of all the colors of the rainbow employed in the proper numbers at the proper salaries just doesn’t jibe with the realities of running a huge company in a free society. As the law requires, applicants for a job should be evaluated on merit and not sex, race, religion, etc, so unless you employ a quota system, the percentages of the sexes or the races will vary greatly according to many factors, hence the 31% figure.

So now the government is in the fruit comparison business, and I hope it does the politically incorrect thing and compare apples to apples, not oranges.

This battle involves the constitutional right to hire who you want, for how much, and who knows about it. It also involves that seemingly indestructible myth of the “pay gap” as well as another feminist goal, “pay transparency.”

Google aspires to achieving gender and racial diversity percentages that are in line with, I assume, the percentage in the population.

But, of course, this is where their efforts are misdirected. They confuse equality of opportunity with equality of outcome, assuming that everyone’s interests are equal, regardless of sex, and that should be evident in the numbers. So, since 31% of Google employees are female – not 50% – it is assumed to be discrimination.

But men and women have different interests and even different expectations, so to compare apples to oranges is pure politics. Men, in general, like computers and coding more than women, so there’s your first big clue. When corrected for hours worked, experience, and other factors, the gap narrows to a couple of points, and in some categories women out-earn men.

Go ahead, Google, show how the feminist/SJW utopia of total equality will allow your company to really blossom with its strength of diversity and ‘girl power.’ Forget those tired ideas of meritocracy where hard work gets rewarded – that isn’t fair – er, I mean – lazy people don’t like it!

Thank goodness the U.S. Dept. of Labor is trying to bully companies into not hiring so many talented people over the less talented. What do they think this is a free country? Nothing good ever came out of freedom and hard work. It’s diversity and equality of outcome that counts!

Google vice president of people operations Nancy Lee said the figures do not reflect where the company wants to be and said many small changes that do not show up in the statistics are having an impact.

She pointed to conversations on diversity leading to a discussion on pay equity, which in turn resulted in a policy of paying employees according to position rather than by negotiated rates, which were often lower for women and minorities.

The figures underscore challenges tech companies face in transforming cultures that critics say are too homogenous, white and male-dominated. The most recent diversity reports from Facebook and Twitter show similar trends to Google in employment of blacks and Latinos, while Apple did slightly better partially due to more diverse hiring at its retail stores.

Lisa Barnett Sween, one of Google’s attorneys, testified in opening remarks that the DoL’s request constituted a “fishing expedition that has absolutely no relevance to the compliance review”. She said the request was an unconstitutional violation of the company’s fourth amendment right to protection from unreasonable searches.

In January, the department sued Oracle, another large tech company, claiming it paid white men more than others, leading to pay discrimination against women and black and Asian employees. Oracle claimed the case was “politically motivated” and said its employment decisions were based on merit and experience.

Because some may not negotiate as favorably as others is no reason to violate constitutional rights: the law must allow all citizens the right to climb the corporate ladder or stay in the mail-room, to speak up and ask for raises or be happy where you are. Men may ask more because they are often the sole-breadwinner, and women less so. Assertive people may, or may not, get the raise.

This nation was founded on the principle of freedom, grounded in the Constitution, that allows freedom of association, right to privacy, and protection from unreasonable searches. Efforts to force companies to pay individuals or groups like amounts or to disclose publicly those amounts flies in the face of those principles. Many jobs, such as civil service, have titled jobs that have set salaries, so anyone working there is paid equally. But many other jobs depend on the supply and demand of certain workers and job skills, so employers compete in the free marketplace for those workersby salary enticements. These freedoms helped to build the greatest economy in the world, allowing Americans to prosper and enjoy an equally great standard of living. That is how Google flourished.

Imagine if feminists got their way and Google – or your employer – had to make public your salary and justify why you get paid more than Joe or Sally, and “because we need to maximize profits” or “because it’s a free country” are not acceptable answers. If proven that a company actively paid women or others less, then that should be actionable and reasonable to pursue, but the fact that some groups flock to certain jobs with different salaries is no reason to assume discrimination.

If the DoL investigation is on the level, it will be precedent-setting evidence that there is no agenda to pay women less, but there is a goal to make a profit out of providing a product that people want – that’s it.

If the DoL wanted to they could also find out things like:

there are more female nurses than male because females seek those jobs far more (work with people, flexible hours, not dangerous)

people who work more hours attain more experience, and hence can demand a greater salary than others

people who work dangerous jobs command better pay

jobs that require frequent travel command better pay

people working the late shift earn extra pay

people with special training or college degrees earn greater salaries

None of these reasons for greater pay have anything to do with discrimination, and are actually the rewards for extra efforts.

Longtime MRA from Long Island, NY , 57 yrs old and and have been active with The National Center for Men, NCFM, AVFM, and continues to be active on and off the street. I had a MRA cable TV show in the early 2000's, and now post MHR videos on my youtube channel where I'm known as jerrytheother. I've attended many protests in the name of MRM - including one leading to us being sandbagged by Micheal Moore on "TV Nation" and being labeled as "angry white men." Well Michael, we're back, with reinforcements!

And here we have the answer to those wondering why gargantuous companies like Google would hurt its optimized workforce in name of “social justice”: federal contracts! There is no problem in soaking up some loss now if it much more money will come latter from the never drying source of money that is the money of tax payers, with overpriced contracts and all that corruption one can expect when dealing with governments.

I wanna see for how long and how much will Google stand against this baseless and unconcluded “investigation” of USA’s DoL. Those companies care only about theirs profits and the left know that very well. I predict soon Google will just throw men (especially whites) under the bus again when their contracts are broken and more money will be throw in propaganda movies like the ones talked about in the linked video.

Dan Slezak

Paying white men more is good for American families! What public official/policy maker couldn’t get behind that?

Oh wait, my bad. White women and THEIR families are more important.

artiefischel

It would be interesting to see if this has any effect on search results for “wage gap”.

The very words “diversity report” are Orwellian. What a strange time we live in, where pathetic, whiny SJWs have gotten the US and the west by the balls. It’s high time to fight back and disinfect the west of feminist ideology

Commenter

Wage gap is not a myth but feminists mean something else with wage gap. So your claims are not working as you want them to.

Wage gap slogan is actually a tool to encourage and force women and other races into workforce.

For example they say women make less for the same job, but that’s not true and feminist know that too, i guess you didnt think feminists are bunch of retards, right? By saying this, they mean there are still many unemployed women, they cant just choose to be a housewife, they must have a job.

”there are more female nurses than male because females seek those jobs far more (work with people, flexible hours, not dangerous)
people who work more hours attain more experience, and hence can demand a greater salary than others
people who work dangerous jobs command better pay
jobs that require frequent travel command better pay
people working the late shift earn extra pay
people with special training or college degrees earn greater salaries

None of these reasons for greater pay have anything to do with discrimination, and are actually the rewards for extra efforts.”

Well, feminists say its a discrimination, but again, they mean something else. This discrimination slogan is actually a tool to change the society’s mindset so people will stop thinking about certain jobs belong to a certain sex.

Your article is justifying feminism actually.

Afterall, Men’s rights is a branch of feminism, not against it.

phaidros52

Men’s right have never been and will never be a branch of feminism, its the straight opposite

Yeah but “he” believes the feminist definition of “patriarchy,” so basically men are shit, though no doubt “he” strongly supports every man’s God give rights to shut up and pay up.

Bora Bosna

No not really. By “wage gap” they mean discrimination against women. They don’t mean anything else at all.

Theseus

Hmmm. I agree with some of what you said and vehemently disagreed with the rest.

Yes it’s true that many feminists know that they are lying when they say that “women make less for the same job”. However many Fems have signed onto this and truly believe it. Feminists are a mix of duplicitous power brokers AND ignorant dupes. So I don’t think there is a nudge nudge wink wink “OK we’ll just say this but what we REALLY mean is this” just to get more women in the workforce.

Oh and another reason why your premise doesn’t work is because you say that the main reason that this is being done is because it is a “tool to change the society’s mindset so people stop thinking about certain jobs belong to a certain sex”. This is complete bullshit, because all the dirty dangerous jobs that have to do with infrastructure, and keeping the world going ’round are dominated by men in the upper 90 – 100 %. However feminists want absolutely nothing to do with trying to get women in these jobs, but want more CEO and office jobs for women. So again, complete nonsense.

As far as the MRM being feminists lol…well this is like saying atheists are wiccans.

Yeah, that one was fill of shit. Whenever feminists try to make more than one simple point at a time, things go south pretty quickly. There’s a 90% chance that point #2 will directly contradict point #1.

Commenter2lol

I actually wrote my comment as a reply to you, but quoted from another guy.

While i let you know about this, i also want to add about ”his is complete bullshit, because all the dirty dangerous jobs that have to do with infrastructure, and keeping the world going ’round are dominated by men in the upper 90 – 100 %. ”;

This is also a consequence of patriarchal norms. Feminists are dying to draft women, force them to hard labor. But patriarchal males, those masculine males insist on traditional manhood, insist on ”females are weaker sex”, that’s why feminists still didnt achieve what they want.

By making some women CEO’s they are encouraging other women into power, but just like how men encouraged into power, only few will achieve this, msot of them become average poeple or poor. But women CEO’s are a must as a symbol, that ”girl power yay, women can do everything”.

It’s like putting some women into military offical positions. First, women will become military officials, then all females will be drafted, will be obliged for military service, no matter what, jsut like males. They are just symbols…

Marcos F.A.

If it is a lie and yet they promote it as absolutely truth how it is not a myth?
How saying women earn only US$ 0.77 for each US$ 1.00 men earn is not about women demanding more money without performing the same?

You are confusing two different things. You are mixing the gender pay gap with less women in certain areas like STEM. The last has nothing to do with the amount paid, they are saying women is not accept because they hate them instead because they simply don’t show up. That is, the discrimination is another lie and, thus, another myth.

You are also mistaking the male branch of feminism with legitimate Men’s Rights Movement. If you look close at those said feminist “men’s rights” they are advocating the old only men are perpetrator even when they see men as victims, the same “women has problem, men are problem”, the very men are evil thing.

And I’m saying that just after I read an “study” of Promundo along with Women’s Research Center (or something like that) about helping violent men in Rio’s favelas. The general argument is that boys exposed to violent environment grow-up as violent men, which is fine, but they simply don’t acknowledge the violence committed by women, especially in cases of domestic violence where there is no women on male attacks. Or they simply pretend there are no mothers abusing their sons. The perpetrator is always a man. The conclusion goes to a need of exposing these “hypermasculine” men (i.e. violence is the way of men) to more “equalitarian” (read feminine/feminist) role models, instead of simply offering them non-violent ways of life like religion (a non-violent and yet traditional way of life).
They are not helping men, they are promoting their male-bashing agenda!

Commenter2lol

Since your almighty moderator banned me, i couldnt reply when i got notificaton e-mails. Its so funny after banning me, she kept replying me haha. Anyways.

Look, i will tell you what is going on, what feminism is, what feminism actually trying to do, how feminism works… etc.

I said Men’s rights are a branch of feminism, just like MGTOW. Do you think feminists didnt know MRA and MGTOW will come up? They knew it and actually they created both MRA and MGTOW. And you guys all punching the air because your methodology is irrelevant if you want to defat feminism.

The whole feminist ideology is actually a mindfuckery because it manipulates the very foundation of entire human interactions, science, logic, emotions… etc, which is “language”.

Feminists are saying they want equality and this is true, besides that, everything you hear from them are actually mean something else.

Feminism’s methodology is language manipulation in order to, well… manipulate the language. And the entire structure with it.

(actual) Feminists (lingualists/philosophers) force feminist hive mind to make them say “A”, people will think they really meant “A”, so some of those people will agree on “A”, while some others will try to debunk it and call their arguments as “B”. But in reality, what actual feminists meant was “C”. The thing is, “B” is not opposing feminism, on the contrary, “B” justifies feminism, which means both “B” and “A” are serving to same ideals and try to reach “C”.

I’ll explain;

1 – The “A”

Feminists force the feminist hive mind (those man hating, blue haired girls) to make them say; “women earn less than man for the same job”. This is the radical action to exaggerate and make visible a traditional norms.

2 – The “B”

After the radical action “A”, there comes the reaction against these exaggerated patriarchal norms, which are MRA and MGTOW… etc. They try to debunk the arguement “A”, by counter attacks such as; “but women don’t go for demanding jobs, but women have the choice to be housewives so they just leave if they don’t want to work or because having a child, because women don’t go for dangerous and demanding jobs that pays better… etc. “.

3 – The “C”

Actual feminists supports the idea of absolute equality and by throwing the gender pay gap slogan, they mean this; “all females must be obliged to work, there can be no housewives”.

And if you you look at “A” and “B”, they are not fighting each other, they are serving the same ideals, which is “C”. They are talking about the same thing but since their language and methodology is different, they can’t understand what’s going on. It’s really funny actually. They dont understand that; feminism is an ideology that justifies itself with its’ contrary.

Now do you understand why you guys are actually feminists?

Feminism is like religions, is like political movements. Just like science can not defeat religions, logic, facts and fairness will not defat feminism as well. Because feminism has nothing to do with logic, fairnes, factss, what is wrong and what is right. Feminism (just like religions) is about the ”language”, is about psychological manipulation, is about creating ”new wrongs” and ”new rights” and ”new facts”, a new way of thinking, a new culture… etc.

You can not defeat something being operated by language manipulation with logic, science, facts, fairness… etc. Feminists bend the language while you are trying to use a branch of sub-language which is logic, and that logic, is mostly for scientific methodology, not for psychological manipualtion (even evolution theory is mostly about language, not about science). This is why all antifeminists are punching the air, all they do is to justify feminist slogans.

As i explained the operation methodology of feminism; Feminists exaggrates the traditional norms so these slogans create imaginary enemies in people’s mind. Then you MRA and MGTOW guys come and do exactly what feminist want you to do and start to justify their slogans (for example; but women choose to go for easy and low demanding jobs, they are not career oriented), so you guys keep these imanginary enemies alive. These two creates what feminists want to achieve.

So do you understand now, what they are actually bashing? They are bashin ”MAN”, not ”males”, They are bashing masculinity, just like how they are bashing ”FEMININITY”.

The word ”feminism” make you uncomfortable, i know, because you dont know what it means. You think feminism is only about females’ rights but no, feminism is not about only females, its also about males. Not about ”male-female” but also about ”man and woman”.

Feminism is a war on femininity of females, and as a side effect, an attack to masculinty of males. Feminism started as a misogynystic ideology, feminism hates ”woman”, as much as it hates ”man”. They started to attack womanhood, as you know, which was a misogynstic approach to patriarchal culture. They attacked on femininity by shaming feminine charachter traits on females and forced them into workforce, force them to become sluts and rebel… etc etc.

Without deconstructing femininty from females, deconstrcuting masculinity from males would be impossible because deconstructing masculinity is much more harder, because its almost irreversible by itself. Without deconstruction femininty and especially masculinty, violence committed by females will never be noticed, male rape victris will never be victims males always will be seen as perpetrators. Because masculinity and femininity ensure that females will always be victims and males always be perpetrators in the eyes of society. ”boys dont cry” is just an easy example, they are males afterall, they are prohibited from crying, from being emotional, from being weak and victim. They are not allowed to have the privelege of victimhood.

This is why feminsts attack on ”man”. You got it?

*****

So next time think twice while criticizng feminism, because you will be criticizing patriarchy most of the time.

Feminists are not bunch of idiots, those lingualists are outsmarting everyone in every aspects available.

Yeah plus he/she was still trying to float the bullshit that feminists still want women in the more male dominated dangerous jobs lol.

Where and who? What feminists are pushing for more female sewer workers, coal miners, construction workers, fisherman, ditch diggers etc? Especially at anywhere near the same rabid obsession that they bleat about needing more female CEO’s?

I really enjoyed that part. If there were any suffragettes who wanted women’s conscription, they sure did STFU in order to get women on board with women’s suffrage. But “Equality!” right?

[I have an old college friend who grew up on the campus and claims to remember back in the 70s when female students were protesting for women to have the “right” to be drafted. She’s now over 50 and I don’t think it has yet to occur to her that although plenty of women wanted the right to serve, none of them were demanding (publicly no less) to be FORCED to serve. I think she’s get along well with our new ex friend.]

urbanviking

Funny. No one actually disagrees with the equal pay for equal work
premise. As long as all the corollaries are included. Equal pay for
actual measurable equal work. None of this equivocation that diversity
of itself makes a company better. Equal pay for equal time. Equal pay
for equal benefits. Equal pay for equal travel. And equal pay for equal
risk, personal and professional! If you lower the bar for the girls in
any of these parameters, the whole equal pay house of cards falls in.

Dr. Who, the Part-Time lord
Halfway through battling the Daleks, the new Doctor leaves her job to seek a better work-life balance. When the Daleks destroy the Universe, the Doctor blames the patriarchy.

Graham Strouse

Seems unlikely to happen. The BBC still cares about its ratings. And even most female Whovians prefer to keep The Doctor male.

Deidre Marie

Google, the poster child of progressive feminism, now having to explain why it’s not paying women ”equally” as men? Love it. That said though, to their defense, some of the data that came out seems to get skewed by the media. I read that mainly, men and women in the SAME positions, are receiving equal pay, but it seems that more men are in higher paying roles, which would seem like there is a wage gap, when in reality, there isn’t one, but there could be a gap in men and women in management roles. (But, that could also be because women aren’t interested in them, not because they’re being passed over for them)

Shrek6

As for the management roles. There is also the other reason that no one likes to talk about. Men are more suited to and are often more capable, when it comes to management roles.

They are simply better at it than most women are!

I’ll bet my big fat green backside that all those woman are being paid the same hourly rate. It makes not a scrap of difference what their pay packet has inside it. And I don’t care if the men are getting thousands more dollars each pay than the women in the same job get.

If they are paid the same hourly rate, then they are all paid a perfectly balanced and equal pay to men and they should all shut the hell up and stop bitching. If they want more money, then learn to work for it and stop believing they are entitled to more without putting in the effort.

Men in general earn more, because in general in the majority of industries, men are far better at it than women are. That is the basic truth and no one can dismiss it, even though no one likes to talk about it.

Deidre Marie

I’m in marketing and advertising, and get paid really well. I think that it’s important to negotiate the right salary in the beginning, and women shouldn’t expect someone else to do that for them.I think that men are natural born leaders to be honest, and most women like to be led, because that too is biological. I feel like it always comes back to biology, shrek! ^_^

Shrek6

You’re right. I agree, I think there is a lot of biology in it, but at the end of the day it makes little difference. Women should just be happy with the fact they get paid for what they do.

We men have always had to be happy with it. Even among the ranks of men there are those who take home big pays, whereas others take home lesser amounts. Either work harder to earn more or just suck it up and be happy with what you have.

Women get what they get, because that is either all they deserve or all they are capable of. And it is no one’s fault. It is what it is!

Making the whole of society bend over backward just to artificially inflate the value of women’s contributions so they can be paid more money or given more notoriety (seen as attention), is only going to ensure the eventual annihilation of that society.

It’s time we put a stop to this childish madness!

Tina

It’s actually not biology (or nature), it is nurture. Today, men are noticeably better at management because they are raised and led to develop these skills throughout their whole lives (nurtured to do so), but nobody is “born” with management skills, and certainly no man or woman can run a Fortune 500 with “natural born talent”. This is actually an expertise that is developed over time.

Shrek6

What a load of utter femtard crap. Nurture my big fat green backside.

Okay, so if it is nurture, are you willing as a woman to take responsibility for all the evil committed by men? After all, it is you women who are the ones who have access to all children during their formative years. And you are the ones who teach men to be violent, because you are violent to them when they are babies. You women also rape your boys, thus creating a future rapist and woman hater.

Nurture will only ever play a very small part. Gynocentric brainwashing plays an even bigger part. But you aren’t talking about that are you?

Women, in general that is, have nowhere near the brain power of men, when it comes to certain skill sets. You can argue this till the cows come home, but you will be forever spouting nothing but femtard hot air.

If women ever in the history of Mankind had the same brain power as men, they (you) would have evolved into something much more than you are today. You would have actually been in partnership with the building of this world. Which of course none of you women ever were. It has been men from start to finish.

And you talking your femtard “Fortune 500” garbage, because big money jobs seems to be the only thing in your vacant skulls, is nothing but a load of codswallop and totally irrelevant to this debate and this subject. It is a fantasy that women have, believing they can operate at this level, when the fact is they cannot.

So tell me. Are you also actively campaigning for equal numbers of women in the sewers, on construction sites, in all manner of filthy dirty and dangerous jobs, plus demanding that front line soldiers are 50% women?

I bet you aren’t. Why?
Because you know not a single woman would ever do such jobs, not only that, well over 95% of women are completely incapable of doing such hard difficult jobs. And no one wants to see female body parts brought home in black bags, after being blown apart by all manner of weaponry.

Don’t come here to a site dedicated to men and tell us that the skills we excel at because they are inherently biologically male and not female, by saying that we have to learn them.

Just one last question. Are you one of these idiot women who devalue all the skill sets that women have, we men do not have?
Do you see these skills as worthless and do you tell your fellow sistas that these skills are worthless or that they were inflicted upon you by men, when in fact they are inherently biologically female?

If you do, you are nothing but a brainless fool. If it were not for the skill sets of the women of the past, we would have never had family, society and the cohesion that kept us together long enough to build the culture that defines us in our own countries.

Tina

Oh my god. I expected certain level of troll-baiting given the website I am on, but you have exceeded all my expectations. Congratulations, you wasted your time.

Btw, came here straight from watching the Red Pill, and I am having informed and intelligent discussion about men’s rights and discrimination elsewhere. AVFM is clearly not the right place for it.

Shrek6

Oh it is the place. Don’t just turn tail and run, just because someone has disagreed with you. I am very happy to argue the toss with you. So why don’t you put up a decent fight, instead of running away?

I attacked your belief not you. I also asked if you were one such person who believes the common femtard garbage. I did not judge you as such. If you are taking offense, then maybe you are one such person.

Tina

Oh no, you did not attack my belief, you (and especially Deidra commenting above) were unaware of a scientific definition of what “nature” is – the “biological approach” you refer to.

Nature means the traits are inherited – genetics, DNA, you know the drill. Genetic variables come from BOTH PARENTS (including the women you like to offend so passionately), meaning your argument fails spectacularly 😉

Shrek6

“Nature – Biological” what’s the difference?
Now you are changing the subject. You can’t even keep it to what you originally said.

I disagreed with your statement that men are not naturally better leaders and that they have to be taught these skills.

Like I said, that is a bunch of femtard garbage. Not all men, but many men are natural born leaders. Far more so than women. These skills can be quite evident in young boys.

Sorry, but there are few things between the male and female sex have in common. You women do not have the same abilities men have, so stop carrying on as if you do and that men only have them because they have been “nurtured” that way.

Tina

Did you just refer to the work of Charles Darwin and John Locke – the most prominent psychology concepts – as a “femtard garbage”? Are you really that delusional?

Feel free to amuse me some more. Genuinely cannot wait.

Shrek6

Um, I’m simply commenting on what you have said. If you are living in some kind of dream world where you see other conversations occurring, then maybe you might need to go see one of these people.

You have been banned either because you have completely ignored the purpose of this site or for a violation of Comment Policy (general contempt for the work AVfM does). [Ref: 10563]

Additional remarks:

Could you possibly be more disdainful? If you just came here from watching TRP, I’d have to guess you’re still in shock from suddenly discovering the the utter fraud to be found in quite a number of other “…informed and intelligent discussion(s) about men’s rights and discrimination” – like the Patriarchy Hurts Men Tooooo! “discussions” to be found in Gender Studies classes.
Just give up and spit out the pill already. Some people just aren’t cut out for it.

Shrek6

My apologies for the over the top response, but you did set me off when you mentioned the well worn femtard crap about Fortune 500 which is nothing but utter garbage. Knowing you take notice of such things, I took it that you believed in such fallacies. If you do not, then I take that back.

As for your little list above, I only asked the question if you were this type of woman. The “boy rapist” was a generalised comment aimed at ‘you women’ as a demographic. You know, just like you women do to us men.

And no, I never said you have lower brain power. I was referring to the skill set that is naturally found in men. In these skill sets, men have greater brain power than women. If you cannot accept that, then you truly are brainwashed.

And by the way, just because I don’t speak to you like a nambie pambie girlie mans, all sweet and nice like, doesn’t mean I am attacking you personally. I am attacking the feminist garbage that so many of us are just so damn tired of hearing and seeing plastered all over every aspect of our existence.

I am a forthright man and I talk like one. I am not some angry man in need of some idiotic femtard anger management training. If I smell a rat……. a femtard rat, I will go after it, male or female.

One more parting comment or question.

I asked you a question about your beliefs of the abilities and skill set of women, which you totally ignored. I made a statement about the importance of women in our society and our world, yet you deliberately stayed right away from it.

Sorry Shrek, Tina has left the building because she couldn’t touch her keyboard without slinging insults in every direction like a money with a handful of shit. Clearly she has been triggered by The Red Pill; she probably slammed face first into the vague possibility that there’s no such thing as a Nice Feminist, and thus her identity has been shattered. If and when she calms down she’s welcome to apply to the ombudsman for a reversal of her ban, but if she comes back she’ll have to leave her feminist theory outside in the rain, so I suspect we’ve seen the last of her.

You don’t get to talk when you’ve been banned. You get a gold star for VARVOing though. Bye now.

hullviking75

Oh God, they’re not still flogging that hackneyed nurture crap, are they? I didn’t get to see the comment. Don’t suppose I missed much, did I?

Shrek6

Yep, the nurture and the fact that fortune 500 leaders are trained in leadership using nurturing methods.
It kind of ‘triggered me.’ Hehe!

Anyway, case is closed now. It’s a dead discussion.

Grumpy Old Man

“It’s actually not biology (or nature), it is nurture.”

It’s a bit of both I think. Our biology drives young boys to be risk takers and influences the way we interact with each other to develop skills. There is much todo and drugging of our young boys and the social pressure for them to be more like our girls at an early age.

I’ve spent 30 years developing leaders and supervised the first three women to achieve the highest level in our career field. The fact is, women tend to disqualify themselves at higher rates than men over all even with the best nurturing. Mostly through different priorities and life balances. Men tend to be a bit more driven in these things and tend to internalize their success or failures much more than women do. This comes at a cost of course, we see it in high suicide rates in men who have faced major life failures at work and/or at home.

IMO, biology predominantly, not in every case of course, preloads men to be more driven. Then there is the fact that men tend to work harder as primary providers over men who do not, and fewer women tend to be the primary providers in marriage/partnerships. I’m sure there is much more to be said on this line.

I agree that all “talent” is developed, and to this end there has been much work in nurturing women in in our education system and work force. Often to the detriment to our young men and boys.

In large organizations I like to explain things this way. As a young up and comer, the challenge is to develop your skills and knowledge. The second part of this is getting noticed, in this women are at a great advantage. I’ve often run into the case where decisions were being made on development and seen where the nearly all women in the organization were carefully looked at and talented men were not even mentioned or got a second look.

In many cases, both men and women were not stepping up and were set aside. In others, both men and women got more caught up in the trappings of gaining success than they were in developing Knowledge and Skills, and they were set aside. Then there are those few standouts who if they do not self eliminate would be well on their way to leadership roles. This is where my previous comment on self elimination comes in play. There is the raw numbers game of more men than women which needs to be factored in, but capturing both men and women on this cusp of success before they self eliminate is important.

“Alan Eustace, one of the heads of engineering, sent an e-mail to his staff describing the two studies and then reminding them [women] it was time to apply for promotions. Immediately, the application rate for women soared and the rate of women who received promotions rose higher than that for male engineers. Every time Eustace sent the same e-mail reminder, female promotion rates climbed. When he once forgot to send that e-mail, the number of female applicants dropped sharply.”

As you can see, it is Google the one that must go to women to promote them and not women that must go after their own promotion as expected (as far as I know, Google don’t do that for other minorities).

Shrek6

Gary, you are the king of facts and logic. Hehe. You look like the guy standing by, watching a bully get his comeuppance and you smile at him and say, “not so tough now are you?”

Such a good article. I can’t wait to see how Goggle (deliberately written that way) get out of this one!

Krillarbran

The west is allowing the established media to run the narrative. And that is why we are in this BS mess with companies and governments pandering to the minority and ignoring our problems completely. Purposefully ill-informed news has become a force to be reckoned with and I am not sure how we can stop this. There are too many idiots out there who do not want facts anymore because the real world is boring to them. Too quick to click flashy worded articles (clickbait) and too gullible to even bother to look at factual evidence even IF any is presented.

TrishRan

I freaking Knew that removing the card catalogues from libraries was a tragic mistake. Giving this kind of power over all the information in our society to a profit-generating corporation full of officers with an agenda is not a good thing. Card catalogues were de-centralized – if one library. was destroyed, the cards still existed at all the other libraries.